Those who attended the RTPI Planning Convention in June would have heard then Housing Minister Yvette Cooper express her profound dissatisfaction that local authorities across the South East were not welcoming the amount of new housing her government was wishing.
Maybe therefore it should be no surprise that the government has announced plans to scrap regional assemblies and pass executive responsibility for planning and housing to Regional Development Agencies (RDAs), which would be responsible for a single spatial and economic strategy.
It was not too many years ago that government was promoting democratic regional devolution as a way of placing power and a certain degree of autonomy and destiny back to regions. This seems a far cry from the current proposal to take executive responsibility for planning and housing away from regional assemblies where local authorities have a strong voice and are able to plan for the region collectively and place it in the hands of the unelected RDAs.
A single strategy has advantages. It is hard to disagree that economic growth, transport and housing need co-ordination to ensure they have complementary objectives and timescales. Greater joined up responsibility in this way also further pushes the already opening door for powerful city regions in a way which new Foreign Secretary and strong Gordon Brown ally would applaud.
However a single strategy prepared by RDAs also has disadvantages. Where is the local accountability? A regional strategy and planning process needs the legitimacy of rigorous testing in if it is to have ownership by local authorities and be delivered, yet the current adoption process for Regional Economic Strategies (RES) does not boast anything like the soundness testing of RSSs. Until such time as a single strategy is formulated does the RES or RSS take precedence?
The question remains as to whether this really is a legitimate continued attempt to drive economic growth in all English regions to narrow the gap between the South East and the remainder of England and streamline strategies which can have competing objectives and timescales for housing, transport and the economy or a cynical attempt to quash the power of local authorities at a regional level. Only time will tell, by which time we will probable have nine joined up regional strategies, none of which relate to each other in a meaningful way. When will government finally accept that England needs a National Spatial Strategy? Tell us what you think at southeast@rtpi.org.uk.
Graham Stallwood
Chair, RTPI South East
Further reading: The Government’s Review of Sub-National Economic Development and Regeneration is available at http://www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1511810

Author:

Carol Dawson

Publisher:

The Royal Town Planning Institute

Date:

02-Aug-07

Categories:

Nations & Regions 

This article has been read 2940 times.